Create and submit and idea for a panel

Nowhere to Hide: Can Twitter Fight Corruption?

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give him a bank and he can rob the world."
Cronyism and dishonesty are rampant, from phonying up the Libor rate to profiting from insider trading. New and complicated regulations to deal with corruption often simply create opportunities for competitors to gain an advantage by operating at the very edge of legality, further undermining our society’s values while doing immense collateral damage to the economy. Sarbanes-Oxley, for instance, designed to prevent the next Enron or Worldcom, might also be preventing the next Google. And who knows what unforeseen costs will be imposed on business by Dodd-Frank.
In this discussion we will explore how interactive technologies might be employed to generate a level of transparency sufficient to eliminate the need for costly and ineffective regulatory actions, permitting the market or the “crowd” to discipline bad behavior by individuals and companies alike.

Questions Answered

What are some examples of cronyism, corruption, and self-dealing that are not being prevented by current regulations?

What kinds of costly or even harmful side-effects are caused by regulations to stamp out corruption?

What conditions are necessary – socially and technologically – to be able to rely on “transparency” as the primary enforcement tool?

How might regulations be better used to ensure more transparency?

How could we use transparency to mitigate insider trading and cronyism?